Coffee shop owner: A large number of customers will pay at least the fair market value for a cup of coffee, even if there is no formal charge. Some will pay more than this out of appreciation of the trust that is placed in them. And our total number of customers is likely to increase. We could therefore improve our net cash flow by implementing an honor system in which customers pay what they wish for coffee by depositing money in a can.
Manager: We're likely to lose money on this plan. Many customers would cheat the system, paying a very small sum or nothing at all.
Which of the following, if true, would best support the owner's plan, in light of the manager's concern?
The new system, if implemented, would increase the number of customers.
By roasting its own coffee, the shop has managed to reduce the difficulties (and cost) of maintaining an inventory of freshly roasted coffee.
Many customers stay in the cafe for long stretches of time.
The shop makes a substantial profit from pastries and other food bought by the coffee drinkers.
No other coffee shop in the area has such a system.
情景:大多数顾客会付给一杯咖啡一个公平的价格,有些可能还会付的更多。因此,为了增加现金流,我们开发一套诚信系统吧,让顾客自己支付咖啡钱。经理对此有反驳:很多顾客可能根本就不会给钱。
推理:显然地,本题中的咖啡店主做出了一个方案推理,经理指出了该方案的一个可行性问题。题目让我们反驳经理的说法。
选题方式:略
选项分析:
A选项:新的系统将会增加客户的数量。如果所有客户都不给钱,那么该系统就算增加了客户数量也不会增加收入。
B选项:通过烘焙自己的咖啡,商店可以减少贮藏咖啡的难度和成本。本选项和“诚信系统”没有关系。
C选项:很多顾客会在咖啡店里停留很久。本选项和“诚信系统”没有关系。
D选项:Correct. 咖啡店的很大一部分利润来自于糕点和其它食物。如果本选项成立,则就算顾客都不给咖啡付钱,咖啡店也可能会赚取利润。
E选项:没有其它的咖啡店拥有这样一个系统。无论其它咖啡店有没有,我们还是无法确定这个系统是否能带来利润。
个人观点。有没有可能是因果。
有些人会cheat,(少付钱或者不给钱)---> 咖啡店亏钱。 问削弱。
方向有两个:1. 他因导致咖啡店亏。2. C和E的关系出现问题(i.e. C发生E没有发生;E发生C没有发生;CE没有关系)
这里很明显1不make sense。所以是方向2CE关系出现问题。
看选项,只有D符合,就算很多人cheat发生了,大部分利润来自于别的地方,咖啡店也不会亏钱。
请老师指教。
问题问的是best support the owner's plan,让加强owner的方案,肯定是方案推理呀
这么说也很有道理啊.....................
一楼的大侠说的对~
毕老师,我想请教一个和此题无关的问题。为什么从相关到因果推理方式的评估方向有 因果方向问题,而因果推理或者果因推理没有呢?
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论